Re: New Version Notification for draft-tsou-6man-hbh-header-update-00.txt

[sreenatha <[e-mail]>]

Hi Joel,
  I am co-author of the draft. I will try to answer your query. 
 	"It seems likely to me that an efficient host implementation can
meet the 
existing requirement relative to sourcing a packet with such options 
without noticeable load.  So there does not seem any point in relaxing 
the requirement."
     As you said, efficient host implantation can meet the existing the
requirement. But not all host will meet the requirement. So we suggesting
solution, so that all host can be efficient in processing of the Hop-By-Hop
header in source node.
	
   "And technically, if the host puts in a strict source route, and the
first 
hop is not directly reachable, it really does need to drop it.  So 
keeping the existing text has a minor benefit."
    Currently Strict Source route option will not come under Hop-by-Hop
header. As we mentioned in the draft, only Jumbo-gram and MLd options apart
from the padding options can be inserted in Hop-By-Hop header.  Routing
header will deal the Source route functionality.  So our solution will not
affect if host puts in a strict source route mode.



Thanks-
B.Sreenatha Setty




Message: 5
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 08:04:17 -0500
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <[e-mail]>
To: Tina TSOU <[e-mail]>
Cc: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: FW: New Version Notification for
	draft-tsou-6man-hbh-header-update-00.txt
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

It seems likely to me that an efficient host implementation can meet the 
existing requirement relative to sourcing a packet with such options 
without noticeable load.  So there does not seem any point in relaxing 
the requirement.
And technically, if the host puts ina strict source route, and the first 
hop is not directly reachable, it really does need to drop it.  So 
keeping the existing text has a minor benefit.

Yours,
Joel